Search

Background: Resistance to second-line drugs develops during treatment of multidrug-resistant (MDR) tuberculosis, but the impact on treatment outcome has not been determined., Methods: Patients with MDR tuberculosis starting second-line drug treatment were enrolled in a prospective cohort study. Sputum cultures were analyzed at a central reference laboratory. We compared subjects with successful and poor treatment outcomes in terms of (1) initial and acquired resistance to fluoroquinolones and second-line injectable drugs (SLIs) and (2) treatment regimens., Results: Of 1244 patients with MDR tuberculosis, 973 (78.2%) had known outcomes and 232 (18.6%) were lost to follow-up. Among those with known outcomes, treatment succeeded in 85.8% with plain MDR tuberculosis, 69.7% with initial resistance to either a fluoroquinolone or an SLI, 37.5% with acquired resistance to a fluoroquinolone or SLI, 29.3% with initial and 13.0% with acquired extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (P < .001 for trend). In contrast, among those with known outcomes, treatment success increased stepwise from 41.6% to 92.3% as the number of drugs proven effective increased from ≤1 to ≥5 (P < .001 for trend), while acquired drug resistance decreased from 12% to 16% range, depending on the drug, down to 0%-2% (P < .001 for trend). In multivariable analysis, the adjusted odds of treatment success decreased 0.62-fold (95% confidence interval, .56-.69) for each increment in drug resistance and increased 2.1-fold (1.40-3.18) for each additional effective drug, controlling for differences between programs and patients. Specific treatment, patient, and program variables were also associated with treatment outcome., Conclusions: Increasing drug resistance was associated in a logical stepwise manner with poor treatment outcomes. Acquired resistance was worse than initial resistance to the same drugs. Increasing numbers of effective drugs, specific drugs, and specific program characteristics were associated with better outcomes and less acquired resistance., (Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2015. This work is written by (a) US Government employee(s) and is in the public domain in the US.)

Background: Increasing access to drugs for the treatment of multidrug-resistant (MDR) tuberculosis is crucial but could lead to increasing resistance to these same drugs. In 2000, the international Green Light Committee (GLC) initiative began to increase access while attempting to prevent acquired resistance., Methods: To assess the GLC's impact, we followed adults with pulmonary MDR tuberculosis from the start to the end of treatment with monthly sputum cultures, drug susceptibility testing, and genotyping. We compared the frequency and predictors of acquired resistance to second-line drugs (SLDs) in 9 countries that volunteered to participate, 5 countries that met GLC criteria, and 4 countries that did not apply to the GLC., Results: In total, 832 subjects were enrolled. Of those without baseline resistance to specific SLDs, 68 (8.9%) acquired extensively drug-resistant (XDR) tuberculosis, 79 (11.2%) acquired fluoroquinolone (FQ) resistance, and 56 (7.8%) acquired resistance to second-line injectable drugs (SLIs). The relative risk (95% confidence interval [CI]) of acquired resistance was lower at GLC-approved sites: 0.27 (.16-.47) for XDR tuberculosis, 0.28 (.17-.45) for FQ, and 0.15 (.06-.39) to 0.60 (.34-1.05) for 3 different SLIs. The risk increased as the number of potentially effective drugs decreased. Controlling for baseline drug resistance and differences between sites, the odds ratios (95% CIs) were 0.21 (.07-.62) for acquired XDR tuberculosis and 0.23 (.09-.59) for acquired FQ resistance., Conclusions: Treatment of MDR tuberculosis involves substantial risk of acquired resistance to SLDs, increasing as baseline drug resistance increases. The risk was significantly lower in programs documented by the GLC to meet specific standards., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2014. This work is written by (a) US Government employee(s) and is in the public domain in the US.)

Background: The prevalence of extensively drug-resistant (XDR) tuberculosis is increasing due to the expanded use of second-line drugs in people with multidrug-resistant (MDR) disease. We prospectively assessed resistance to second-line antituberculosis drugs in eight countries., Methods: From Jan 1, 2005, to Dec 31, 2008, we enrolled consecutive adults with locally confirmed pulmonary MDR tuberculosis at the start of second-line treatment in Estonia, Latvia, Peru, Philippines, Russia, South Africa, South Korea, and Thailand. Drug-susceptibility testing for study purposes was done centrally at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for 11 first-line and second-line drugs. We compared the results with clinical and epidemiological data to identify risk factors for resistance to second-line drugs and XDR tuberculosis., Findings: Among 1278 patients, 43·7% showed resistance to at least one second-line drug, 20·0% to at least one second-line injectable drug, and 12·9% to at least one fluoroquinolone. 6·7% of patients had XDR tuberculosis (range across study sites 0·8-15·2%). Previous treatment with second-line drugs was consistently the strongest risk factor for resistance to these drugs, which increased the risk of XDR tuberculosis by more than four times. Fluoroquinolone resistance and XDR tuberculosis were more frequent in women than in men. Unemployment, alcohol abuse, and smoking were associated with resistance to second-line injectable drugs across countries. Other risk factors differed between drugs and countries., Interpretation: Previous treatment with second-line drugs is a strong, consistent risk factor for resistance to these drugs, including XDR tuberculosis. Representative drug-susceptibility results could guide in-country policies for laboratory capacity and diagnostic strategies., Funding: US Agency for International Development, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and Korean Ministry of Health and Welfare., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)